- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Ivermectin: Cancer killer Are you aware of these studies?
Posted on 3/6/25 at 11:44 pm to Obtuse1
Posted on 3/6/25 at 11:44 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
It is a simple argument, but excuse the directness; it is also simple-minded.
No worries. I'd think the other way... you are missing the remarkably large idea that everything wants to persist. That's the whole point. From our fascination and need to chase immortality, to the structures, companies and processes we create, to a lizard, a fish, a microbe. It's all about persistence. Immortality.
The thing about medicine is that it sits on a complicated divide.
If lifespans were short and things were harder to solve, there wouldn't be much of a medical industry.
If everything was cured, there also wouldn't be a medical industry.
So what is going to keep the industry going... and growing? An innumerable amount of problems, that are not solved - but managed. There is only short term value in solving things.
quote:
still going to need or want intervention from the medical industry.
Well yeah, those are dollars.
I'm not saying that the medical industry actively works against saving people.... but it would also prefer them to stay around and pay to manage symptoms, etc.
quote:
Look at the history of medicine, they don't need to avoid low-cost cures; they will make their money as the people age. If you take a close look, keeping people alive longer increases the revenue as a whole.
My wife has patients she has patched up multiple times; in the past, they probably wouldn't have lived to have a second surgery, much less a third or fourth.
Exactly. Not sure we disagree. Curing cancer is of no interest. Managing cancer is where it's at.
And while thread is about cancer, I'm not saying specifically that really, just in general the medical industry as a monolith, is not interested in curing things.
This post was edited on 3/6/25 at 11:51 pm
2
Posted on 3/6/25 at 11:50 pm to Freauxzen
Curing cancer would be a bananorama for the medical industry. Just consider what they could charge for a cure.
Posted on 3/6/25 at 11:56 pm to Zappas Stache
Not as much as managing it indefinitely.
Again, my comment was more general than cancer.
It's as simple as looking at the Military Industrial Complex. Like Medicine, military was about protecting the country, protecting our interests, protecting democracy. And turned into a conglomerate to create war, create the opportunity to sell goods and services related to War. Peace is of no interest, and of no value.
Again, my comment was more general than cancer.
It's as simple as looking at the Military Industrial Complex. Like Medicine, military was about protecting the country, protecting our interests, protecting democracy. And turned into a conglomerate to create war, create the opportunity to sell goods and services related to War. Peace is of no interest, and of no value.
Posted on 3/6/25 at 11:59 pm to Freauxzen
Youve already been radicalized.
Posted on 3/7/25 at 12:03 am to Zappas Stache
quote:
Youve already been radicalized.
Eh, not really. Things don't want to die. That's not radical. Self preservation? Not radical.
You, yourself, wouldn't do something positive to completely eliminate the need for your job UNLESS it provided you with enough resources to satisfy your lifelong needs and more. No one would
A system is more complicated, but will naturally act the same way.
This post was edited on 3/7/25 at 12:05 am
Posted on 3/7/25 at 12:09 am to Freauxzen
Tell me more.......
Posted on 3/7/25 at 12:13 am to Zappas Stache
It's the other way around, tell me why i should believe that regardless of the fact that in multiple systems, markets, situations, that, philosophically speaking, humans will organize to create something and sustain it, especially if their livelihood depends on it...
That in this ONE instance, it's different? Why? Suddenly when it comes to medicine, it's an industry that seeks to make itself irrelevant?
That in this ONE instance, it's different? Why? Suddenly when it comes to medicine, it's an industry that seeks to make itself irrelevant?
Posted on 3/7/25 at 12:17 am to Freauxzen
Yes, Yes. You're brilliance is blinding.
Posted on 3/7/25 at 1:16 am to Freauxzen
quote:
You, yourself, wouldn't do something positive to completely eliminate the need for your job UNLESS it provided you with enough resources to satisfy your lifelong needs and more. No one would
That for most people is true but not for all but that is irrelevant.
The point I have tried to make is no matter what we have cured in the past and no matter what we cure in the future until humans are able to live forever and only die of violence, accidents, and suicide the medical industry will be needed. Extending the average lifespan for people is actually a positive for the total revenue of the medical industry. The medical industry is NOT afraid of cures, they can monetize a drug even if it is cheap (I explained that in an earlier post), and they keep those people around to continue to age and have more medical issues. It might reduce demand in some specialties but the demand goes up in other specialties. I have literally seen it in my wife's specialty and also detailed that in a previous post.
I will torture one of Warran Buffet's analogies.
Imagine we can only have one car for our entire lives. Arguendo the engines of all those cars has an average lifespan of 100k miles and it dies a non-reversible death. When it does those owners would be walking for the rest of their lives. Now if someone invents an oil additive that makes the engine last forever the car repair industry would love it because after that 100k when most cars would die they live on and have to get transmission, power steering pumps, differentials, etc for much longer. This is true even if they made money nursing those engines along from 80k to 100k.
Posted on 3/7/25 at 2:40 am to Obtuse1
quote:
The point I have tried to make is no matter what we have cured in the past and no matter what we cure in the future until humans are able to live forever and only die of violence, accidents, and suicide the medical industry will be needed. Extending the average lifespan for people is actually a positive for the total revenue of the medical industry. The medical industry is NOT afraid of cures, they can monetize a drug even if it is cheap (I explained that in an earlier post), and they keep those people around to continue to age and have more medical issues. It might reduce demand in some specialties but the demand goes up in other specialties. I have literally seen it in my wife's specialty and also detailed that in a previous post.
I will torture one of Warran Buffet's analogies.
Imagine we can only have one car for our entire lives. Arguendo the engines of all those cars has an average lifespan of 100k miles and it dies a non-reversible death. When it does those owners would be walking for the rest of their lives. Now if someone invents an oil additive that makes the engine last forever the car repair industry would love it because after that 100k when most cars would die they live on and have to get transmission, power steering pumps, differentials, etc for much longer. This is true even if they made money nursing those engines along from 80k to 100k.
I agree with this 100%. If I inferred they were afraid of cures, that's my bad. But I also don't think curing is of the best interest of the industry either. It COULD be, but it could also be detrimental. All I mean is that the industry is always necessarily as interested in curing as you think it would be.
Posted on 3/7/25 at 2:42 am to Zappas Stache
quote:
Yes, Yes. You're brilliance is blinding.
That's not the point, but at least try to answer the question, I've already given a couple of responses who why "systems" and industries act the way they do. Government gets bigger, bureaucracy creates bureaucracy to create more "administrative" needs. We create war to sell war goods and services, etc. Planned Obsolescence. And on and on.
None of that is new or brilliant, it's just human.
Posted on 3/7/25 at 3:23 am to Freauxzen
quote:
I've already given a couple of responses who why "systems" and industries act the way they do.
But they aren't all that compelling and fall into influencer traps of 'all or nothing' logic, especially your notion of what 'curing' a person means. It falls into blind cynicism. Human biology is complex. Medicine doesn't have reasonable curative options for each and every illness. The primary aspect of medical care once the allopathic system was formed was to combat infectious diseases. There were several pathogens that were perfectly robust to human biology, able to cause disease in every demographic. The victories of our battle with infectious disease are why we have the population across the world that we do. Once we mostly conquered that, and people began surviving childbirth (both woman and child) and lifespans extended, medicine has been transitioning to the biosocial sphere.
But in that realm there are sometimes no easy curative options. That is where the growth comes from, from understanding human relations, categorizing what is pathologic, medicalizing it, and offering treatments which work. And we are still in the absolute infancy of that.
Also, in another post you said
quote:
I'm not saying that the medical industry actively works against saving people.... but it would also prefer them to stay around and pay to manage symptoms, etc.
I hope you really think about what this means. Because, yes I would rather save people from terrible illnesses so they can stay around. I want to keep people alive. The fact that at some point later they will have to see a doctor at some point for other issues is a fact of human biology, not the invisible hand of some medico-industrial complex which you can't even describe in detail.
Posted on 3/7/25 at 6:41 am to crazy4lsu
You're likely debating with a part-time barista who's in his seventh year at BRCC.
Posted on 3/7/25 at 6:50 am to LSUAngelHere1
quote:
Colonoscopies and mammograms are scams. Nicotine fights cancer.
Your patients are infested with parasites and yet you still push all these lies and invasive procedures that cause more damage.
I bet you encouraged patients to get the social experiment injection and nuked their immune system so now they’re getting hepatitis, AIDS, myocarditis, etc.
You probably sound like you know what you are talking about to people who don't know any better, but I really hope there is no one who takes your advice when it comes to their health.
How are mammograms a scam? Its for detect cancer right? And the idea is to find cancer at the earliest stage as possible? So are you saying mammograms do not do what its supposed to do?
Posted on 3/7/25 at 6:52 am to N2cars
Nah, he and I have spoken before, and I know he's a sharp dude. And I think it is really easy to be cynical about the medical industry, especially in recent years and especially given the remarkably poor health of Americans broadly.
There are definitely pointed criticisms of the medical industry you could make. For the life of me, I don't know why we allow pharmaceutical commercials. I understand them, but often, I already get the spiel from all the reps that come and go. I like the reps, especially when they bring lunch, and will listen to them, so I've broadened my awareness of new treatments, even those that aren't directly related to my field. But I don't understand what purpose they serve for the general public. What people tend to fixate on is not the drug, but the adverse effects, which need to be mentioned yes, but also they just tend to stress people out and serve as medium for distrust for any medication.
I also dislike private equity's involvement in hospitals, as I tend to think that trying to derive profit or excessive profit from medical care can lead to some really perverse incentives. All of us need to be paid for our work, but focus on excessive profit is going to value procedural interventions, whereas medication and social management get very little money and attention in general.
It would be easy to be cynical, but I also think we can do better, although I am not the man to do that. I don't care about the business side, I just want to treat patients. Thus I am not sure how to fix the situation but like others I can sense that there is something wrong about approaching the patient as an opportunity for profit rather than as a human being.
There are definitely pointed criticisms of the medical industry you could make. For the life of me, I don't know why we allow pharmaceutical commercials. I understand them, but often, I already get the spiel from all the reps that come and go. I like the reps, especially when they bring lunch, and will listen to them, so I've broadened my awareness of new treatments, even those that aren't directly related to my field. But I don't understand what purpose they serve for the general public. What people tend to fixate on is not the drug, but the adverse effects, which need to be mentioned yes, but also they just tend to stress people out and serve as medium for distrust for any medication.
I also dislike private equity's involvement in hospitals, as I tend to think that trying to derive profit or excessive profit from medical care can lead to some really perverse incentives. All of us need to be paid for our work, but focus on excessive profit is going to value procedural interventions, whereas medication and social management get very little money and attention in general.
It would be easy to be cynical, but I also think we can do better, although I am not the man to do that. I don't care about the business side, I just want to treat patients. Thus I am not sure how to fix the situation but like others I can sense that there is something wrong about approaching the patient as an opportunity for profit rather than as a human being.
Posted on 3/7/25 at 7:17 am to crazy4lsu
I've never met a medical doctor yet, especially critical-care, that didn't want to cure patients.
They certainly aren't in it for the money.
All this blather about them being in the pocket of "big pharma " is just ridiculous.
People can sound educated, and yet still be ignorant of a topic.
They certainly aren't in it for the money.
All this blather about them being in the pocket of "big pharma " is just ridiculous.
People can sound educated, and yet still be ignorant of a topic.
Posted on 3/7/25 at 7:55 am to LSUAngelHere1
quote:
Colonoscopies and mammograms are scams. Nicotine fights cancer.
Your parasite is dementia.
Posted on 3/7/25 at 8:12 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
I like the reps, especially when they bring lunch, and will listen to them,
There you have it folks
Posted on 3/7/25 at 8:16 am to WigSplitta22
quote:
There you have it folks
What?
Posted on 3/7/25 at 8:38 am to WigSplitta22
quote:
I like the reps, especially when they bring lunch, and will listen to them,
There you have it folks
Wait until you hear about lunch and learns. Spoiler: every professional in every industry is listening to people pitch their product.
Page 12 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News